North/South Implementation Bodies: Budgets

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 2 April (WA 132) concerning the budgets for the North/South Implementation Bodies: (a) whether in each case there were discussions with the boards before the budgets were decided; (b) if so, when and what was agreed; (c) on what authority any changes were then made to each budget; and (d) which, if any, political advisers were involved and what advice did they offer to the Ministers concerned.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Arrangements for agreeing and approving the budgets for the North/South Implementation Bodies for 2003 were contained in the agreement made by the exchange of notes between the two Governments dated 19 November 2002. The dates on which the recommendations for the budgets for each of the North/South Bodies for 2003 were approved under the above arrangements are set out in the table below. Prior to approval by the two Governments the proposed budgets for the bodies were the subject of consultation between the departments concerned, and agreement by the Finance Ministers north and south.
	The special advisers in the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister were consulted on the budgets for the bodies prior to the British and Irish Governments approving the recommendations for those budgets. These advisers do not offer advice to Ministers.
	
		Table showing date of approval of 2003 budgets for North/South Implementation Bodies
		
			 Implementation Body Date of Approval 
			 Waterways Ireland 24 February 2003 
			 Language Body 26 February 2003 
			 Food Safety Promotion Board 27 February 2003 
			 Trade & Business Development Body 25 February 2003 
			 Special EU Programmes Body 6 March 2003 
			 FCILC 11 March 2003

North/South Implementation Bodies: Budgets

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 2 April (WA 132) concerning Cross-Border Implementation Bodies, on what date the budget for 2003 was agreed between the Northern Ireland Department of Finance and its counterpart in the Republic of Ireland's Government; on what date the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure was informed; when the cut was announced; in what form was the announcement; and in what way did it observe the policy of transparency.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Minister responsible for the Department of Finance and Personnel in Northern Ireland agreed the budget for 2003 for the Language Body on 29 January 2003 and the Irish Finance Minister agreed the budget on 19 December 2002. The budget was then approved on 26 February 2003 under the agreement made by the exchange of notes between the two Governments dated 19 November 2002. The North/South Ministerial Council Joint Secretariat formally advised the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure on 7 March 2003 that the budget for the Language Body had been approved under the above arrangements. Details of the agreed budgets for the Implementation Bodies were placed in the Library on 7 April.

North/South Implementation Bodies: Budgets

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In connection with the North/South decision making process, whether they will lodge all papers relating to the setting of implementation bodies' budgets for 2003 in the Library of the House.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The papers relating to the budgets of the Implementation Bodies, which were agreed by the British and Irish Governments under the exchange of notes of 19 November 2002, have been placed in the Library.

North/South Joint Secretariat

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What machinery exists to evaluate the working and cost-effectiveness of the North/South Secretariat in Armagh.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The cost-effectiveness of the North/South Joint Secretariat is monitored within the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister's budgeting and planning process, and business objectives adjusted if necessary.

Language Implementation Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the activity since 1999 of the two sections of the Language Implementation Body is satisfactory; whether they have received representations from the Government of the Irish Republic on this activity; and, if so, what were the representations.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The activity of the two agencies since 1999 has been considered satisfactory in terms of contributing to fulfilling their statutory functions. The Irish Government make known their views on the Language Implementation Body through the North/South Ministerial Council. Day-to-day dialogue takes place between the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure and the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs in the South in their roles as sponsoring departments for the Language Body. Similar discussion takes place as necessary between the Department of Finance and Personnel and the Department of Finance.

Waterways Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 2 April (WA 132) concerning expenditure by Waterways Ireland, whether the contribution to the body's funding is in proportion to capital expenditure; and why the Government of the Irish Republic only contributed 90 per cent of the budget in 2000 but obtained 100 per cent of the capital work.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Current expenditure by Waterways Ireland on administration and running costs is financed by the two jurisdictions on the basis of 85 per cent from the South and 15 per cent from the North while capital expenditure is funded totally by the jurisdiction in which it is incurred. The total contribution by each jurisdiction in any year reflects both the current and capital spend of the body in that year.

Ulster Scots and Irish Languages

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 21 May (WA 79) concerning the status of Irish and Ulster Scots, whether the Belfast Agreement of 1998 affords both languages equality.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The agreement states that all participants recognise the importance of respect, understanding and tolerance in relation to linguistic diversity, including in Northern Ireland, the Irish language, Uster Scots and the languages of the various ethnic communities, all of which are part of the cultural wealth of the island of Ireland.

Peace II Funding

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 21 May (WA 87) concerning the Peace II grant scheme, how the application of Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 is monitored; and by whom.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The application of Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 is embedded into the Peace II programme through the horizontal principles and the application and selection process for projects, which gathers Section 75 information on both the applicant and organisation, and the intended beneficiary groups.
	Overall monitoring of the Peace II programme, including Section 75, is undertaken by the Peace II Monitoring Committee, which is chaired by the SEUPB and includes representatives from the Equality Commission and Government departments, social partners, local government and the environment sector. In addition, a Mainstreaming Equality Working Group is in place to advise the Monitoring Committee and the SEUPB on Section 75 matters.

Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure: Budget

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the budget allocation for the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure for 2003–04; and what percentage difference there is compared with 2002–03.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The opening budget allocation for the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure for 2003–04 is £99,049,000 an 11.5 percentage increase compared to 2002–03.

Iraq: Humanitarian Situation

Lord Dubs: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the humanitarian situation in Iraq.

Baroness Amos: The immediate humanitarian situation in Iraq is improving, although many challenges lie ahead. DfID's contribution to this effort is significant. We have already committed £115 million to support the work of humanitarian agencies in the current crisis; £99 million of this has been allocated to specific activities through United Nations agencies (£63.8 million), the Red Cross and Red Crescent (£32 million) and NGOs (£3.4 million). These are the organisations best placed to deliver humanitarian assistance where it is most needed. We have also set aside a further £95 million to meet additional needs as they emerge. DfID teams on the ground in Baghdad and Basra are working with the coalition provisional authority and UK military, and helping to co-ordinate the humanitarian effort.
	Progess is being made. Basra now has as much water as it did before the conflict; all 12 main hospitals in Baghdad are functioning; rubbish is being removed from the streets of Baghdad and Basra; the food distribution system is working again and has sufficient pipeline stocks of the main commodities; electricity supply sytems are being repaired; public sector salaries are being paid; and Iraqi policemen are returning to duty.
	Much remains to be done however. One of the most critical challenges is ensuring law and order, and managing the security sector to ensure that the Iraqi police and armed forces are reformed effectively, and that demobilised soldiers are reintegrated properly into civilian life. More needs to be done to improve Iraq's capacity to provide its people with basic services such as health, education, clean water and sanitation. It will also be important to maintain the effort to clear Iraq of mines and unexploded ordnance, some of which go back to Saddam Hussein's war with Iran in the 1980s; and to make possible the orderly return of Iraqi refugees from neighbouring countries.
	It will also be important to ensure as far as possible the full involvement of women in political and economic affairs, to rebuild Iraqi civil society, to develop independent news media, and to create a favourable environment for Iraqi private sector development.
	The Development Fund for Iraq will be the central means for financing Iraq's public services, as well as meeting the costs of reconstruction and development, during the process of political transformation. It will be essential that the fund's priority setting and resource allocation processes work as transparently as possible for the clear benefit of the Iraqi people, as envisaged in UN Security Council Resolution 1483 of 22 May.
	The United Nations is preparing an update of its Flash Appeal for Iraq. It will be discussed at an official level meeting in New York on 23 June, which will be followed by an informal meeting of donors. Any further DfID contribution towards emergency humanitarian assistance will be considered in view of the needs identified in the revised appeal and the outcome of the discussions in New York. Consideration of the allocation of DfID funding for longer-term reconstruction and development will be undertaken in light of the social and economic needs assessments currently being carried out by the World Bank, IMF and United Nations.

Convention on the Future of Europe

Lord Desai: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will hold an event to consider the Convention on the Future of Europe.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office will hold a half-day seminar for parliamentarians on the Convention on the Future of Europe. This will take place in the Locarno Suite of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, on Tuesday 17 June, between 09.15 and 13.00.
	This offers Members and Peers an opportunity, outside of Parliament, to hear a variety of views on the Convention on the Future of Europe, and to discuss these issues with some prominent speakers. This will include the Foreign Secretary; the Government's representatives to the Convention, Peter Hain MP and Baroness Scotland; our parliamentary representatives, Professor Alan Dashwood and the Polish Ambassador.
	A provisional programme for the seminar is available on the FCO website at www.europe.gov.uk

Tenancy Money

Lord Clinton-Davis: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to announce their conclusions following the consultation on Tenancy Money; Probity and Protection.

Lord Rooker: Last November we consulted on options for safeguarding tenancy moneys to address concerns that an appreciable number of tenants were losing out and the image of the private rented sector as a whole was suffering.
	The consultation paper followed two years of government funding of a pilot tenancy deposit scheme. It reflected the evidence that a voluntary scheme was not an effective option. Take-up of the pilot had been poor and so were the prospects of a self-financing voluntary national scheme. So, we sought views on the case for compulsory measures.
	The consultation paper indicated that there is not a robust basis for legislating to compel the protection of tenancy moneys in third party schemes. It showed that with costs of £19 million per annum and benefits of £20 million per annum, the case for so legislating was finely balanced. I have to say that the responses to the consultation were equally inconclusive.
	Nevertheless, the Government are committed to addressing the case for legislation alongside consideration of proposals that the Law Commission plans to publish by this autumn, particularly with regard to written tenancy agreements. That seems an appropriate context in which to address the safeguarding of tenancy money.
	We have learnt some useful lessons from government funding of the voluntary pilot tenancy deposit scheme—not least that there was no prospect of it becoming a self-financing voluntary scheme with a substantial membership. Therefore, so far as government funding is concerned it will have to be wound up. Nevertheless the Government would be more than happy to endorse self-financing voluntary schemes in advance of legislative proposals.
	We will publish detailed proposals and a full response to the consultation later in the year, in the light of what the Law Commission publishes.

Veterinary Medicines

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What further representations the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has received from the president of the British Veterinary Association regarding the investigation into the supply within the United Kingdom of prescription-only veterinary medicines; what reply is being sent; and what action is being taken.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The president of the British Veterinary Association, Peter Jinman, wrote to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry on 22 May 2003. A reply will be sent to Mr Jinman shortly.
	My right honourable friend has asked the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to discuss with interested parties the terms of orders that could be made under the Fair Trading Act 1973 (FTA) to implement the Competition Commission's proposed remedies. Those interested parties include the British Veterinary Association. The OFT will report back in the summer. The Secretary of State will then consult publicly on her intention to make an appropriate order under the FTA.
	The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is currently considering the Competition Commission's regulatory recommendations and will publish a response in due course.

Employment Act 2002

Lord Wedderburn of Charlton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether draft regulations have been produced concerning the provisions on disciplinary and grievance procedures in the Employment Act 2002; whether these drafts have been made available on the Internet; whether they have been or will be made available to all those to whom they were promised in the course of debates in Parliament on the Employment Bill; and why there has been little publicity concerning their contents.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Government are currently finalising drafting of the regulations under Part 3 of the Employment Act 2002, with input from an advisory group which includes employer organisations, trade unions, and other key agencies
	Public consultation on these draft regulations is expected to start in July. The consultation paper and draft regulations will be available on the Internet and in other formats. Copies will be placed in the Libraries of the House and will be sent to a wide range of stakeholders. The start of the consultation exercise will also see the beginning of a comprehensive, wide-reaching guidance and communication programme designed to inform employers and employees about their new rights and responsibilities in this area, which the Government intend to introduce in October 2004.

North West Science and Daresbury Development Group

Lord Smith of Leigh: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which schemes that were identified in the review of spending on scientific projects in the north-west of England by the Byers committee have been implemented; and why others have not gone ahead.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Byers review is the North West Science and Daresbury Development Group. Of the projects recommended in March 2001 by the NWSDDG:
	1. The North West Science Council has been established, bringing advice from local business leaders to regional science projects. In November 2002, the council produced a regional science strategy for the North West—the first in UK.
	2. The proposed public/private partnership to act as a bridge between the Daresbury laboratory and companies has been suspended by the creation of CLIK. This is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Central Laboratories for the Research Councils (CCLRC). CLIK will manage Daresbury's exploitation activities and is supported by a grant of £4 million. In April, the North West Development Agency announced £25.7 million of funding to develop Daresbury Science Park in partnership with CCLRC.
	3. The proposed Centre for Accelerator Science and Imaging and Medicine (CASIM) led to two projects:
	The SIRIUS proposal for a proton cyclotron was discussed with a number of potential funding agencies. In April 2002, the Research Council's UK Strategy Group reviewed the proposal. Although the nuclear physics element of the proposal was rated highly their advice was that the capital and operating cost of the facility could not be justified on the basis of nuclear science alone. A final decision was withheld until the outcome of the National Cancer Research Institute's review of the UK's requirement in radiobiology and radiotherapy was known. This review has concluded that although there is a case for the evaluation of protons, and light and heavy ions as a treatment option, it is not perceived as a priority by the majority of stakeholders. In view of these conclusions the prospective partners in the project (the Department of Health, the Medical Research Council and the Office of Science and Technology) have decided not to take the project forward. The project will thus receive no funding from the science budget.
	On 2 April, we announced funding of £11.5 million for Daresbury for an exploratory phase for the other project, the 4th Generation Light Source (4GLS). These funds will be used in a three-year study to establish the technical know-how and build a prototype test facility.
	On 12 March, we announced the go-ahead for a new £30 million flagship manufacturing centre for biosciences, which could bring 1,000 new jobs to Liverpool. The National Biomanufacturing Centre in Speke will consist of three laboratories and a production plant. A £9.74 million grant has been agreed from Merseyside's Objective 1 programme for the National Biomanufacturing Centre and £3 million has already been invested by DTI. The majority of the remaining funding will come from the NWDA. Up to 1,000 new jobs could be created by the facility, which will cement Merseyside's position as the national hub of biomanufacturing.